My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06-16-1997 Planning Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
1997
>
06-16-1997 Planning Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/6/2023 8:47:18 AM
Creation date
9/6/2023 8:40:23 AM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
361
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
MINUTES OF IHE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br />MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 21,1995 <br />(#10 -'#2049 Fred Guttormson & Chic Dwight - Continued) <br />Lindquist asked why the deck and porch would be beyond the bouse. The applicant saiJ <br />there was surface hardcover there already. Lindquist said the desire of the Planning <br />Commission is to remove as much hardcover in the 0-75' zone as possible. It was noted <br />that there is a 1x6' patio extention leading from the patio doors. Lindquist said the deck <br />could be replaced but the extension removed. The deck should not extend beyond the <br />house. <br />Gaffron asked the Comr"ission if approval were given for the walkout, would this be <br />setting a precedent by allowing a change to the grade. <br />The applicant said her purpose was to gain light into the lower level of the home and <br />modernize it. The applicant said it appears the grade was put in when the home was built <br />and not originally there. <br />Peterson said he saw a problem with the bench by the dock and asked applicant if they <br />would be willing to eliminate the accessory structure to gain the deck. <br />The applicant said about 1000 s.f of ..ardcover has been removed and felt they were being <br />sensitive to that issue. The applicant said the property was purchased in part because of <br />the deck structure by the lake. Peterson said it would not be allowed today. The <br />applicant said she would be willing to remove the shed by the lake. <br />Lindquist asked if the deck could be 8' instead of 8'6". <br />Schroeder said the strucniral coverage should not exceed the amount on the property as it <br />exists now. He suggested ;he driveway extension and outhouse-size shed be removed as <br />mediation for the deck. Any additional hardcover In the loop driveway that is unneces^ <br />was also asked to be removed. The applicant said this was required to turnaround noting <br />the inability to park on Tonkawa. Berg said she used the loop area in which to turn <br />around. <br />Peterson said the applicant should be concerned with the problems being created by <br />beavers gnawing on the trees. Major erosion problems could occur in the future due to <br />the loss of these trees. <br />Peter'm asked if the issue is altering the lakeshore if the grading is changed. Gaffron said <br />it would be a conditional use but Staff saw no need for this to be done and would not <br />recommend approval for this or boulder walls. <br />Smith asked what could be done to maintain the shoreline, Gaffron said the boulder wall <br />would help erosion from coming to the house and rip-rap could be done to prevent shore <br />erosion. A Watershed District permit could be obtained to rip rap.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.